I'm all for rationality, and I don't feel bad about crushing people who can't back up their claims and beliefs.

But reason is just that, coherence. And reason should, I guess, accepts that relativity is what seems to be extractible from empirical study of sense data and other means of data retrieval. Sense data being itself reliable to a degree and consistent as far as relevant scales, environnements and frequencies(so energy levels) are concerned.

So, my point is, that logic is but a branch of a wider rationality, which takes into account the relative relevancy of feelings and well, every sort of information available and look for internally coherent systems given the possible applications in the environnement and of course the degree to which applicability seems to tend to universality.

Then ofc it's all about the number of computations vs survival value/pleasure induced by a satisfying answer.

But I could go like that forever. Networks, you know.

Forward and into the Nether void!

If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

Like we could attribute traits for each dimension, group them into 3d constructs then have an overall information dense idea of what we're talking about directly just by visualising the images.
The cool side is that if ur just talking about highly culturally relative things the system would be limited to very few dimensions, perhaps 3 or less if the system is simplified making for simple visualisation (no need for multiple pictures, you could also get data from super imposition of 3d pictures, and a color code)

Expression of the post modern paradox : "For the love of god, religions are so full of shit"

Theory is always superseded by Fact...
... In theory.

“I’d hate to die twice. It’s so boring.”Richard Feynman's last recorded words

"Great is the human who has not lost his childlike heart."Mencius (Meng-Tse), 4th century BCE

And, yeah, a huge part of it is that there's this allergic reaction, almost, to logical inconsistency. When thoughts are processed from external sources, it's as if they're just flowing into me, and, it's easy for me to figure out how they fit into my inner overall mental map. So, when a thought that appears to be logically inconsistent gets picked up, it's like a jarring stop to the flow. It hinders me from moving on to process any more new external information, because I'm stuck trying to figure out where/how that logically inconsistant piece of information goes, and how to deal with it properly. This is what leads to my frustration.

It's not as much because it's a cherished baby as it is a nuisance to my thought process. It's like watching a streaming video, and your net is lagging, which stops the video every so often.....which makes it choppy and irritating to watch. That's what happens when my external perception picks up information, while my Ti is working on figuring out where that information fits, and then, an information arrives that contradicts something previously picked up, and it stops the video. Irritation.

As for just saying, "wrong", versus "can you explain your reasoning?"...it depends on my mood, and my want to appeal to my tertiary Fe. When I was younger, I gave the former answer much more than now.

Sometimes, the true answer is so apparent (to me), that I just need to point out the wrong answer, and leave it at that, because my mind is calmed again, as it successfully dealt with the "incorrect"/logically inconsistent information by acknowledging it. I.e., "wrong" = stop (taking the idea further given that piece of info).

Often, I do explain why it's wrong, but when I don't really explain why, it's because my mood is just not there to invest the energy to explain or want to know why they got the answer they did (because, to me, the answer seems obviously wrong, so knowing how they arrived at it is irrelevant). I just want to put a stop to it, with minimal effort and consideration (of anything, like, the person on the other end). Thus, I leave it to the other party to ask (if they're even interested), for clarification - and due to that explicit request, I'll invest that Fe energy to explain it to the other. Otherwise, I just simply want the peace of mind knowing that my mind can keep with the flow of processing information as logical inconsistencies are explicitly acknowledge, stopped, and, I can move on to the next. My flow.

Yeah! That was what I was trying to puzzle in my head. (But my Ti isn't so clear, it's like an INTP trying to do a math equation without his glasses , he's effectively blind and frustrated that he doesn't know half of what's going on.)

I think my annoyance comes from not understanding them, but being put into the 'weakling' position for what feels like an unfair reason, and not being allowed to explain myself... if I can. Since Ni is a way of perceiving the world, it works on its own, it's also worse since I'm underdeveloped and Se takes more control, whipping out what I thought was witty too fast before I recognize how stupid it is. Also, language is linear while my thoughts are not, adding to the confusion if I say something that was ingenious in the wrong way.

How would you react to someone apologizing for the slip up?

'Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and its better to be absolutely ridiculous than absolutely boring.' - Marilyn Monroe

Since Ni is a way of perceiving the world, it works on its own, it's also worse since I'm underdeveloped and Se takes more control, whipping out what I thought was witty too fast before I recognize how stupid it is. Also, language is linear while my thoughts are not, adding to the confusion if I say something that was ingenious in the wrong way.

How would you react to someone apologizing for the slip up?

We're not exactly ISTJSrobots either

Expression of the post modern paradox : "For the love of god, religions are so full of shit"

Theory is always superseded by Fact...
... In theory.

“I’d hate to die twice. It’s so boring.”Richard Feynman's last recorded words

"Great is the human who has not lost his childlike heart."Mencius (Meng-Tse), 4th century BCE

Yeah! That was what I was trying to puzzle in my head. (But my Ti isn't so clear, it's like an INTP trying to do a math equation without his glasses , he's effectively blind and frustrated that he doesn't know half of what's going on.)

I think my annoyance comes from not understanding them, but being put into the 'weakling' position for what feels like an unfair reason, and not being allowed to explain myself... if I can. Since Ni is a way of perceiving the world, it works on its own, it's also worse since I'm underdeveloped and Se takes more control, whipping out what I thought was witty too fast before I recognize how stupid it is. Also, language is linear while my thoughts are not, adding to the confusion if I say something that was ingenious in the wrong way.

How would you react to someone apologizing for the slip up?

Well, firstly, don't think that you need to apologize to the ENTP just because they think it's wrong. It could very well be that the premise the ENTP started with (the specific piece gathered by Ne) is not the same premise you had. Thus, your response didn't match up with their internal, subjective Ti (logical) analysis, as they're going off their premise, and concluding you to be wrong. Which is wrong on their behalf, from your perspective.

However, if you do think you understood the premise they had in mind, and thus, their logical process to reach the conclusion they did ("wrong"), and you agree with that, you can just acknowledge that (apology or otherwise, like saying, "Ah, gotch, I see what you mean."). E.g., most likely scenarios are when objective facts are in question.

I actually get kind of irritated when people bend over backwards apologizing to me for pretty much every little thing. It makes me wary like they're expecting some kind of social grace from me, in return, and/or that they're perhaps overly sensitive and just need to agree for the sake of agreement. It seems trite.

But, if you can't really understand how your answer is "wrong", it may very well be that you and the ENTP had very different premises in mind. So, ask them to either explain their premise and how they reached the conclusion they did, given your answer....OR....tell them your thought process, outline your mental model and how/why you arrived at the answer you did.

I really like knowing the step by step process of how a person reached their conclusion, the associations they made, etc., if we're in a disagreement. I like transparency in information exchange.

Have you ever seen Ti not bound by reality? Not in like a fun Ne way...but in a kinda weird way.

For instance an ENTP I know kept trying to convince me I should be buying platinum and holding it as an investment. Okay, logically there may be no fault in this idea. But-perhaps this is the premises part-for me, in my particular situation-I do not have time to deal with such a complex investment scheme, thus it is inefficient and the incorrect answer (Te says so!). I didnt argue or anything, but just jotted it down mentally as weird.

Most of this entps's ideas are like this-yes, logically they connect, but in the dimension we all live in, they are not the best path forward. Even worse they will sometimes be inconsistent with historical data. It worked once, thus is correct-even if no one else can replicate. They are flawed, not the idea. He will spend months arguing these points with the other entps. I have another entp-4.5M-who has done this same thing. 4.5M has costs my at least 200 work hours in the last year that were wholly focused upon removing his ideas from my product line. Funny, I do like him nowdays. He isnt evil, just not quite "right".

I have been chatting with K about how Si may help ENFPs ground Fi. How does Si help ENTPs ground Ti? or does it? I dunno... Could these be failures of Si to ground Ti ideas in reality?

Well, firstly, 1*don't think that you need to apologize to the ENTP just because they think it's wrong. It could very well be that the premise the ENTP started with (the specific piece gathered by Ne) is not the same premise you had. Thus, your response didn't match up with their internal, subjective Ti (logical) analysis, as they're going off their premise, and concluding you to be wrong. Which is wrong on their behalf, from your perspective.

However, if you do think you understood the premise they had in mind, and thus, their logical process to reach the conclusion they did ("wrong"), and you agree with that, you can just acknowledge that (apology or otherwise, like saying, "Ah, gotch, I see what you mean."). E.g., most likely scenarios are when objective facts are in question.

I actually get kind of irritated when people bend over backwards apologizing to me for pretty much every little thing. It makes me wary like they're expecting some kind of social grace from me, in return, and/or that they're perhaps overly sensitive and just need to agree for the sake of agreement. 2*It seems trite.

But, if you can't really understand how your answer is "wrong", it may very well be that you and the ENTP had very different premises in mind. So, ask them to either explain their premise and how they reached the conclusion they did, given your answer....OR....tell them your thought process, outline your mental model and how/why you arrived at the answer you did.

3*I really like knowing the step by step process of how a person reached their conclusion, the associations they made, etc., if we're in a disagreement. I like transparency in information exchange.

1*So ENTPs, or at least you, don't think disagreement is something worthy of apologizing for if you can explain your side? What is worth apologizing for? I'm just curious.

2* I understand that, though when I apologize its when I feel like I lost 'points' (Think 'The Sims') with them. Recouping losses is the goal in mind when I do. I feel shitty if I don't feel like I did enough to fix a situation.

3* What I think bugs ENTPs the most is that my train of thought is usually inconsistent, or NONexistent, which almost always shoves a non-sequitur into the ENTP's gears. Since I'm unbalanced, I make so many slip-ups by non thinking before I speak, because I lose whatever I thought and can't usually get it back again.

Q do you sleep?

ExxPs don't sleep often unless they work (Even then!). Most that I know prefer to substitute Red Bull, or something more to their taste, for sleep.

'Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and its better to be absolutely ridiculous than absolutely boring.' - Marilyn Monroe

1*So ENTPs, or at least you, don't think disagreement is something worthy of apologizing for if you can explain your side? What is worth apologizing for? I'm just curious.

Why apologise for disagreeing? Isn't apologising something people do when they've done something that would upset another person? If you're talking about an all-out, gloves off style argument then that's a different thing but I read this as in debating a topic that you and the ENTP disagree on.

Keep in mind as a general rule ENTPs enjoy debating, it doesn't matter if the other person is right or wrong or a good or bad debater, we like people with different opinions cause that makes us rethink our stance and/or argument and it mostly matters that they don't get emotional as in upset because we're prolly enjoying ourselves. Apologising would indicate to me that if I say something wrong in my argument (which I'm mostly probably detached from emotionally even if I'm passionate about it) then I'll upset you as you are taking it personally, asking to explain in more detail an aspect that you've misunderstood or clarifying that you've misunderstood would be received better imo.